I relate to the example y'all provided about feeling like failing at feminity. I remember feeling terrible comparing myself to these feminine ideals and feeling like I did not measure up at all. But also feeling intense discomfort if I tried. I just remember the icky icky skin crawling feeling of trying to be feminine. I remember looking at my beautiful female face full of makeup in the mirror at school and scrubbing it off on the sink and feeling better. But all I could think about was going home and changing into my "boy" clothes. I remember not eating to hope my curves would go down. weighing myself every day. And getting upset when I could not get below 130 lbs. I have no idea what it was to this day. I sit with the grey. Androphilia doesn't seem to explain it.
Reminder that the majority of people up in arms about him wearing a dress also most likely liked this tweet by JK Rowling: “Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security…”
When we hear about or see a man wearing women's clothing, it's nearly always sexual, and so of course it's going to make women uncomfortable to suddenly and unexpectedly encounter a man in public, in a professional environment, who by all appesrances seems to be engaging in a fetish. Women are understandably scared of men imposing sexual things on us without our consent, and something like this would set off those alarms in many women.
it’s not sexual for gay men who are the main ones confident enough to wear women’s clothes in public what are you talking about? this is a dangerous assumption
I go along with J K Rowling's tweet: "Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like … Live your best life in peace and security...". I'd have no problem interacting with a man in a dress in a public place as long as he behaved appropriately, didn't try to follow me into the women's toilets or force me to say that he is actually a woman. Anyone you meet might be having sexual thoughts about you or any number of things - as long as he isn't acting in an inappropriately sexual way, who cares?
The trouble with ascribing people's differing perspectives as wmntl illness is that the same applies to most academics & practitioners of psychological services
They get knickers in a twist for his objectivity, for being descriptive rather than biased and for holding wmn's fetish to the same frame as men's fetish even when it's precisely the same fetish!
39:52 this really sounds like phils experience, no? Half of this chat feels like, the hosts making very valid criticisms and phil saying, but saying that out loud could have bad consequences for me
Whatever your personal discomfort with the idea of AGP, you’ve got to admire Phil for his honesty. From my own experience, I have yet to meet a trans identifying individual who is not on the autism spectrum. I think this way of thinking, the need to categorise, to the ‘nth degree, even the self, is the ‘overvalued idea’ fuelling trans ideology.
Have to pause to comment: There's an obvious chasm between Phil and especially Stella that seems to have its root in a divide between trying to describe something vs trying to therapize/help someone. It is like Phil is trying to talk about different kinds of maps, and Stella only wanting to talk about the actual physical landscape. The map is a _tool_. If you forbid the tool, or only accept certain "correct" tools, you will get lost. A map may look very categorical and definite; it can still be correct for *what it is*, a map, not a comprehensive view of everything. Some maps can be very useful even when they are quite wrong in some details. (As a somewhat autistic person this is not the first time I get an insight into why I had such problems with psychotherapists as a child and a young person. As a teenager I tried to use computer-analogies to describe to my therapist how I experienced things/functioned and all I got from that was a great sense of being wrong, or at best a profound indifference. I'm sure Stella or Sasha would have been better - but people work in different ways, and it is not helpful for the patient to continually have their way of making sense of the world pathologized.)
Tagging on to this: Stella is really annoying me with this hyper-feminine insistence of this or that not being sexual, this sharp sexual/non-sexual boundary doesn't feel helpful. Like not helpful at all. Phil's more broad definition seems much more workable as ONE (of many) potentially interesting/helpful maps or tools. Phil's comment about how similar behaviours or statements are read very differently depending on the sex of the person rings very true to me. And jumping off from that: Looking at fashion and gendered roles, and perhaps especially those small tiny behavioural cues or quirks over a few centuries, could we perhaps say that the female version of autosexuality (broadly construed) is actually rather accepted? As a heterosexual female I can pick up a chainsaw, a glass of whisky or dress however masculine I want without anyone doubting my heterosexuality, and this was to some extent also true already for my great-grandmother 100 years ago (she did intricate woodworkings). When it comes to females we tend to discount sexuality as a driving or contributing force for any cross-gender expression or behaviour. Unless we see it really really flamboyantly clearly, we pretend it isn't there, and can't be there.
You two really got stuck into Phil. You were much more deferential when talking to Mike Bailey, Anne Lawrence and the Dutch Clinicians who have also made a great many questionable assertions in their writing.
Wmn are happy to pathologise male saxuality but not female saxuality even when they're both doing the same thing (getting off imagining they're opposite sax). Perhaps this is the Othering Narcissism & Solipsism the two female therapists talked about earlier, or maybe it's just female supremacy & Misandry
This has been a difficult video to watch. Im picking up on the AGP introversion, linked to the fact they think it is innate. Is this a lack of insight that is indicative of a mental health disorder? I am a desister, i 100% think trans identities are formed due to the nurture. The majority of behaviours are not sex specific, even though our cultures (gender) might say otherwise. It is the shame an individual might experience for their sex/gender non conforming behaviours that leads them to believe they are not the sex they are. There isnt enough focus on this, its just straight to 'i am the opposite sex' but the missing step prior to this is due to the othering they experience for having a natural behaviour that is deemed wrong due to sexist sterotypes
It was obvious for a long time, this guy only sounded vaguely interesting to some people, because nobody really challenged his half baked ideas. A feather tap prod was enough to dismantle his whole framework.
Stella has a very poor understanding of neurodivergence. She attacks Phil over and over with the justification that he is autistic and therefore his ideas are autistic and flawed. She accuses him of black and white thinking and being fixated on categories while being very attached to her own favourite categories like ROGD and homo/heterosexuality. His thinking is more nuanced and complex than hers. She doesn’t seem to acknowledge that just in order to use language and communicate we use categories constantly. It doesn’t have to be a reductive process and it is unfair that she accuses Phil of being reductive. She is displaying a lot of hypocrisy here. I imagine she might be a nightmare of a therapist if she makes up her mind about who a client is the way she had her mind made up here about who Phil is. Thank god Sasha was a bit more balanced and fair or the conversation would have been very painful to listen to.
45:00 Stella makes a great point about the author not having credentials. Thing is, what difference does credentials make? We've all seen the fig leaf of credentials and 'academic' research fall to reveal it's ugly wound.
@@peterbreughel4440 he was so rude to the Irish interviewer. Seriously, rematch the start with that in mind, he was absolutely the definition of condescending.
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
I relate to the example y'all provided about feeling like failing at feminity. I remember feeling terrible comparing myself to these feminine ideals and feeling like I did not measure up at all. But also feeling intense discomfort if I tried. I just remember the icky icky skin crawling feeling of trying to be feminine. I remember looking at my beautiful female face full of makeup in the mirror at school and scrubbing it off on the sink and feeling better. But all I could think about was going home and changing into my "boy" clothes. I remember not eating to hope my curves would go down. weighing myself every day. And getting upset when I could not get below 130 lbs. I have no idea what it was to this day. I sit with the grey. Androphilia doesn't seem to explain it.
Oooh, gonna be a fun comment section.
Phil Illy's book Autoheterosexuality is a must read!
Reminder that the majority of people up in arms about him wearing a dress also most likely liked this tweet by JK Rowling:
“Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security…”
When we hear about or see a man wearing women's clothing, it's nearly always sexual, and so of course it's going to make women uncomfortable to suddenly and unexpectedly encounter a man in public, in a professional environment, who by all appesrances seems to be engaging in a fetish. Women are understandably scared of men imposing sexual things on us without our consent, and something like this would set off those alarms in many women.
Sounds like a phobia and more exposure will help you get over it
it’s not sexual for gay men who are the main ones confident enough to wear women’s clothes in public what are you talking about? this is a dangerous assumption
@@shiina29 100%
I go along with J K Rowling's tweet: "Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like … Live your best life in peace and security...". I'd have no problem interacting with a man in a dress in a public place as long as he behaved appropriately, didn't try to follow me into the women's toilets or force me to say that he is actually a woman. Anyone you meet might be having sexual thoughts about you or any number of things - as long as he isn't acting in an inappropriately sexual way, who cares?
@@OrwellsHousecat no thank you.
There are things I don't want to exposed to or get comfortable with because I have healthy boundaries.
The trouble with ascribing people's differing perspectives as wmntl illness is that the same applies to most academics & practitioners of psychological services
They get knickers in a twist for his objectivity, for being descriptive rather than biased and for holding wmn's fetish to the same frame as men's fetish even when it's precisely the same fetish!
It's great you've had him back again.
39:52 this really sounds like phils experience, no? Half of this chat feels like, the hosts making very valid criticisms and phil saying, but saying that out loud could have bad consequences for me
Whatever your personal discomfort with the idea of AGP, you’ve got to admire Phil for his honesty. From my own experience, I have yet to meet a trans identifying individual who is not on the autism spectrum. I think this way of thinking, the need to categorise, to the ‘nth degree, even the self, is the ‘overvalued idea’ fuelling trans ideology.
Have to pause to comment:
There's an obvious chasm between Phil and especially Stella that seems to have its root in a divide between trying to describe something vs trying to therapize/help someone.
It is like Phil is trying to talk about different kinds of maps, and Stella only wanting to talk about the actual physical landscape.
The map is a _tool_. If you forbid the tool, or only accept certain "correct" tools, you will get lost.
A map may look very categorical and definite; it can still be correct for *what it is*, a map, not a comprehensive view of everything. Some maps can be very useful even when they are quite wrong in some details.
(As a somewhat autistic person this is not the first time I get an insight into why I had such problems with psychotherapists as a child and a young person. As a teenager I tried to use computer-analogies to describe to my therapist how I experienced things/functioned and all I got from that was a great sense of being wrong, or at best a profound indifference. I'm sure Stella or Sasha would have been better - but people work in different ways, and it is not helpful for the patient to continually have their way of making sense of the world pathologized.)
Tagging on to this: Stella is really annoying me with this hyper-feminine insistence of this or that not being sexual, this sharp sexual/non-sexual boundary doesn't feel helpful. Like not helpful at all.
Phil's more broad definition seems much more workable as ONE (of many) potentially interesting/helpful maps or tools.
Phil's comment about how similar behaviours or statements are read very differently depending on the sex of the person rings very true to me.
And jumping off from that:
Looking at fashion and gendered roles, and perhaps especially those small tiny behavioural cues or quirks over a few centuries, could we perhaps say that the female version of autosexuality (broadly construed) is actually rather accepted?
As a heterosexual female I can pick up a chainsaw, a glass of whisky or dress however masculine I want without anyone doubting my heterosexuality, and this was to some extent also true already for my great-grandmother 100 years ago (she did intricate woodworkings).
When it comes to females we tend to discount sexuality as a driving or contributing force for any cross-gender expression or behaviour. Unless we see it really really flamboyantly clearly, we pretend it isn't there, and can't be there.
You two really got stuck into Phil. You were much more deferential when talking to Mike Bailey, Anne Lawrence and the Dutch Clinicians who have also made a great many questionable assertions in their writing.
Credentials
Wmn are happy to pathologise male saxuality but not female saxuality even when they're both doing the same thing (getting off imagining they're opposite sax).
Perhaps this is the Othering Narcissism & Solipsism the two female therapists talked about earlier, or maybe it's just female supremacy & Misandry
This has been a difficult video to watch. Im picking up on the AGP introversion, linked to the fact they think it is innate. Is this a lack of insight that is indicative of a mental health disorder? I am a desister, i 100% think trans identities are formed due to the nurture. The majority of behaviours are not sex specific, even though our cultures (gender) might say otherwise. It is the shame an individual might experience for their sex/gender non conforming behaviours that leads them to believe they are not the sex they are. There isnt enough focus on this, its just straight to 'i am the opposite sex' but the missing step prior to this is due to the othering they experience for having a natural behaviour that is deemed wrong due to sexist sterotypes
So..... Wmn are Agp?
Do dragons exist?
Does he work in IT?
It was obvious for a long time, this guy only sounded vaguely interesting to some people, because nobody really challenged his half baked ideas. A feather tap prod was enough to dismantle his whole framework.
You are completely wrong. Phil is brilliant and builds 9n sound research.
How ironic for female therapists to say that it's narcissistic & solipsistic 😂
How is that ironic? Autogynophilia is CLEARLY very narcissistic.
Stella has a very poor understanding of neurodivergence. She attacks Phil over and over with the justification that he is autistic and therefore his ideas are autistic and flawed. She accuses him of black and white thinking and being fixated on categories while being very attached to her own favourite categories like ROGD and homo/heterosexuality. His thinking is more nuanced and complex than hers. She doesn’t seem to acknowledge that just in order to use language and communicate we use categories constantly. It doesn’t have to be a reductive process and it is unfair that she accuses Phil of being reductive. She is displaying a lot of hypocrisy here. I imagine she might be a nightmare of a therapist if she makes up her mind about who a client is the way she had her mind made up here about who Phil is. Thank god Sasha was a bit more balanced and fair or the conversation would have been very painful to listen to.
Agree. Not sure why she doesn't want to dive into autogynephilia with an individual most capable of enlightening her.
First!
second!
45:00 Stella makes a great point about the author not having credentials. Thing is, what difference does credentials make? We've all seen the fig leaf of credentials and 'academic' research fall to reveal it's ugly wound.
Phil is brilliant. Listen to interviews and read his book.
I don't like this person at all.
Hes rude and condescending.
Can't bear to watch until the finish.
Calling him rude & condescending is Misogyny! Apologise.
I don't find him that way. He has autism so is somewhat blunt. And this is more of a debate. They are challenging him so it's natural he'll push back.
This is the only thing you know how to say.
You obviously didn't watch because Phil was thoughtful and polite.
@@peterbreughel4440 he was so rude to the Irish interviewer. Seriously, rematch the start with that in mind, he was absolutely the definition of condescending.